The exposure is excellent and the tone range is wide and visually appealing. Cutting up body parts is a surefire way to engage the viewer at least initially. The framing is provocatively different enough to invite some curiosity about the "rest of the picture." And the stump mirrors the leg in an interesting way, and the lace whatever adds interesting content. A story emerges if one cares to think about it, and I think it can also invoke social commentary for the idea that we are normally looking at young legs, not old ones.

The photograph reveals the photographer and it is quite effective. It has more stopping power than most, and I enjoy the idea of it a lot. I see an artist's eye.

There's some visual interest in the parallel lines of rocks. And the exposure is ok considering the overcast flat lighting. Where I think the photograph fails is the framing and composition. Everyone in the world has stood on this cliff and looked at the ocean with this angled down facing view. The minute you look at the picture you work backwards to the photographer standing there with camera pointed down. Sometimes, you need to use your feet and hunt down a more interesting angle.

I can see where this content could be made interesting in a photograph, but it would take a bit more work. More trial and error even to find a more intriguing POV. I might be able to imagine an abstract featuring these parallel lines of dirt, rock, ocean, rock, ocean, sky and so forth. Maybe, maybe not, but you wouldn't get that with this static old view.

I think you found a subject- I just don't think you nailed what the subject had to offer.

This is a delicate and intriguing photograph with oodles of rewards to the viewer. I was intrigued by the chewed on leaves that are in the more diffuse b/g. I think many would be tempted to frame out those "defective" leaves, but I think they are making this picture more than just the patterns. The lighting is really nice here and provides tone, depth and contrast to the form. I may be seeing it wrong on the screen, but it looks to my eye like the plane of focus is about 1/3 up from the bottom, and I can't say that seems ideal to me. All things considered, I would probably prefer the focus to be sharper in the f/g where the large point is. That's a quibble. This works for me very well.